C O N S E R V A T I V E J U D A I S M A N D I S R A E L

A S y m p o s i u m

The emergence of the State of Israel marks one of the noblest achievements in modern Jewish history. Yet the future of the young state is by no means clear. While its very physical existence seems to hang in the balance, its spiritual develop­ment is likewise uncertain. Even in a time of national emer­gency, it may be well for us to consider some of the deeper problems that confront the state and examine what contribu­tion we of the Conservative movement can make in this direction. Three distinguished members of our movement, each of whom is well known for his love and labor for Zion, have been invited to participate in this Symposium.

Editor

O U R S H A R E IN E R E T Z Y IS R A E L *

A Program for C onservative Judaism

by

M o sh e D a v is

I

A s w e come to consider the long-range program of the C onservative

m ovem ent in E r e t z Y i s r a e l , we are deeply aw are of the p resen t danger which

th rea ten s the life of the S ta te of Israel. Because of th is danger, some counsel

exclusive concern for th e im peratives of th is difficult hour, and postponem ent

of a n y long-range program w hich re la tes to th e personal and sp iritua l iden tifica­

tion of A m erican Jew ry w ith E r e t z Y i s r a e l . C erta in ly the tim es are frau g h t w ith

danger, and call for our vigorous action to g e th e r w ith world Jew ry. W e of the

C onservative m ovem ent m ust n o t, how ever, postpone the search to em bed our

e ternal bond w ith E r e t z Y i s r a e l w ith in the fram ew ork of our to ta l com m itm ent

to Judaism . T here are du ties of the hour. T here are opportun ities of the age.

In fulfilling the d u ties of th e hour, we dare no t neglect the o pportun ities of

the age.

Precisely because the tim es are perilous for Israel and the world, precisely

because the political security of Israel is likely to be th rea ten ed for a long tim e

* Condensed from an Address delivered at the United Synagogue Convention, November, 1955.

26

27OUR SHARE IN ERETZ YISRAEL

to come, we dare n o t confuse im m ediate urgencies w ith basic needs. Indeed,

I too ask : W h a t a r e the im pera tives of th is critical hour? H ow do we m eet our

obligations to h istory?

T he h isto ry of Ju d a ism teaches us th a t one faces a crisis best by devoting

himself, even in the very h ea t of the crisis, to th e p erm an en t and enduring

values of Juda ism and m ankind. F or the very n a tu re of a crisis is im per­

m anence, transcience, an in te rru p tio n in the norm al developm ent of m ank ind .

O ur T rad itio n teaches us, therefore, to place crisis in perspective and to m eet it

as a m om ent in h istory . A nd h isto ry is no t hysteria . T o be deflected from the

p e r m a n e n t ta sk is the real defeat. T he enem ies of Israel m ust no t succeed to

m ake us forget the fu tu re .

T he people in Israel u n d erstan d th is tru th . W hile the em issaries of Israel

are pursuing every possible political o p p o rtu n ity in th e world cap ita ls, and

while th ey plead for peace a t every o p p o rtu n ity , th e people of Israel are

devoting them selves in even g rea te r m easure to peaceful deeds a t home.

W e can do no less. W e, too, should realize th a t in order to claim our

share in the H oly L and, we m ust look beyond continu ing crises to plan the

E r e t z Y i s r a e l program of the C onservative m ovem ent on th e foundations of

perm anen t peace. As citizens of the U nited S ta tes , we will, of course, continue

to seek all possible m eans, in concert w ith A m ericans of all faiths, to secure the

political and m ateria l grow th of the only dem ocracy in the M iddle E ast. And

as m em bers of the world Jew ish com m unity , we will m eet, w ith ever increasing

support, our responsibilities to the U nited Jew ish A ppeal and B ond drives.

B u t as m em bers of the C onservative m ovem ent we have a special c o l l e c t i v e

com m itm ent to E r e t z Y i s r a e l , w hich goes beyond these obligations.

T he U nited Synagogue is exactly w h at its nam e says it is: a union of

synagogues — a religious b ro therhood. O ur p a rticu la r com m itm ent to E r e t z

Y i s r a e l m u st therefore be d irected to the religious and educational tasks of

Is rae l’s fu tu re . W e look forw ard to the day when the young S ta te will be no t

only a cu ltu ra l force in the world, b u t also, as it was in the days of the prophets,

a source of sp iritua l insigh t and hum an hope for the fam ily of the world. In

the realization of th is asp ira tion , we in the U nited Synagogue w an t to have an

ac tive share, as p a r t of our own to ta l com m itm ent to the ideals of Judaism .

II

In p lanning our fu tu re share i n E r e t z Y i s r a e l , w e m ust tak e in to accoun t the

changing conditions of m odern life: in com m unications, in th e w orld of ideas

and in religious affairs. I would like to po in t up th e special relevance of these

changes to our program in E r e t z Y i s r a e l .

F irst, w orld civilization has en tered the A ir Age. W h a t is significant to us

is th a t the air age is no t only reshaping the econom ic geography of the w orld,

it is also affecting cu ltu ra l and sp iritua l cen ters of influence. T he new era in

trav e l has sh runk the w orld, and for us th is has a lready w rought ex trao rd in ary

changes in th e cohesiveness of Jew ish com m unal life. I t has c rea ted a new

MOSHE DAVIS28

p h y s i c a l u n ity am ong th e Jew s of the w orld, p articu la rly betw een Israel and

A m erica. New Y ork will soon be only tw elve hours from Je ru sa lem ; and w ithin

tw o decades even th a t d istance m ay be cu t to th ree hours.

In th e Jew ish w orld, the a ir־revolu tion has v irtu a lly ab rogated the theo ry

th a t the Jew s in E r e t z Y i s r a e l and Jew ish com m unities th ro u g h o u t the w orld

are necessarily separa te cu ltu ra l and religious en tities. T h e conquest of space

has in troduced w onderful possibilities for continuous in terchange of men and

ideas. “ Going to Je ru sa lem ” need no longer be post-m ortem ; it can be a p a r t

of life, and it has a lready becom e a rea lity for increasing num bers of Jew s.1

M ost im p o rtan t, to d ay Israel is a suburb of A m erica; and in sp iritua l term s

A m erican Judaism can be a suburb of Jerusalem . In th e new age, we live side

by side. I t will soon tak e as long for an A m erican Jew to get to Jerusalem as

it took S abato M orais to trav e l each week from Philadelphia to N ew Y ork

seven ty years ago, when he undertook to estab lish the Sem inary as a n a tiona l

in stitu tio n .

In the light of th is new freedom of com m unication , we m ust p lan boldly,

im aginatively . For individuals, those who do no t plan to se ttle perm anen tly

can certa in ly th in k of living in Israel for some p a r t of th e ir lives. For our

in stitu tio n s, we can plan to estab lish sections of our educational d ep artm en ts

in Israel and im plem ent com m on program s of action w ith k indred groups in

Israel.

A second revo lu tionary developm ent is the rap id em ergence of Israel as

the con tem porary em bodim ent of ancien t H ebrew cu ltu re and civilization.

T his is a phenom enon which has caugh t the im agination of th e cu ltu ra l and

in te llectual world. I can cite no b e tte r exam ple th an E dm und W ilson, who

described in deta il in the N e w Y o r k e r how he cam e to tak e up the s tu d y of

H ebrew and Bible, and how th is s tu d y helped him to u n d erstan d th e H ebrew

m ind. T h e fac t th a t H ebrew — and all th a t i t im plies — is spoken again as

a living tongue, and th a t o u t of Zion have come fo rth scholars, scien tists and

a rtis ts , has created an a tt i tu d e of renew ed respect for Jew ish cu ltu re . T his, in

tu rn , has given an im petus to Jew ish c rea tiv ity in all its m an ifesta tions

th ro u g h o u t the d iaspora.

P leased as we m ay be w ith th e effect of the Israeli renaissance on the

broader cu ltu ra l life, we are even m ore im pressed w ith the effect th is very

renaissance has had on so m any of our fellow-Jews, and especially on m any

young and gifted ta len ts whom we never won to ourselves, who have rem ained

alien to Jew ish trad itio n as expressed in A m erica, and who have suddenly

discovered them selves as Jew s. H undreds of b rillian t A m erican Jew ish tech ­

nical experts have chosen to serve Israel, ignoring g rea te r m ateria l and p ro ­

fessional rew ards. I t is reported th a t th e ir num bers “co n stitu te p roportionally

the largest single concen tra tion of v a rie ty in foreign know -how ever afforded

one nation by a n o th e r .” N um bers of Jew s are th u s com ing to learn ab o u t th e ir

people and th e ir trad itio n th rough the m otive power of E r e t z Y i s r a e l .

1 The new Eshkol edition of the Siddur concretizes this relationship with a supplementary prayer inserted for air travel following the prayers for those who travel by sea and land.

2 9OUR SHARE IN ERETZ YISRAEL

A th ird profoundly significant fac to r is the am azing new in te rest in the

L and itself, in Israe l’s h istoric past. In th is connection, I do n o t refer only

to th e rem arkable perform ance of archaeologists over the p as t decade and to

the recen t exciting discoveries of the D ead Sea Scrolls, b u t also to the grow ing

in te rest am ong varied groups in th e abiding values of Juda ism . T h is in te re s t

derives from th e new ly-aw akened concern w ith religious ideas w hich has

gripped th e A m erican m ind. A m erican C hristian trad itio n alw ays espoused

the fu lfillm ent of th e p rophetic vision of th e R etu rn . W hen we exam ine

A m erican religious h isto ry , we see reflected again and again the deep passion

and love which the A m erican people have for the H oly L and. G overnor

T heodore R. M cK eldin, a consecrated cham pion of hum an righ ts (who is

giving unique service to Israel as P residen t of th e A m erica-Israel Society),

describes in an address “T he Jew s of M ary lan d ,” the effort in the early n ine­

teen th cen tu ry of T hom as K ennedy and o thers to elim inate d iscrim inato ry

legislation which affected the Jew s. T he young K ennedy who, strangely

enough, never cam e in to co n tac t w ith Jew s un til th e la s t years of his life,

b rough t in a rep o rt which is one of the earliest and one of th e m ost ferven t

C hristian s ta tem en ts on Zion.

B u t if we are C hristians, we m ust believe th a t th e Jew ish N atio n will

again be resto red to th e favor and p ro tec tion of G od. M ay we n o t hope

th a t th e banners of th e children of Israel shall again be unfurled on the

walls of Jerusalem and on the holy hill of Z ion.2

T his love for the H oly L and and for Zion reb u ilt has been a pervading

influence in A m erican religious life.3 I t has b u ilt a m ighty reservoir of friend­

ship and ac tive help for Israel, and th e blessings have been m anifest in s trange

and beautifu l ways. In our own day , P residen t T ru m an consciously — and

tru ly — likened his role in helping the estab lishm en t of th e S ta te to th e role

of C yrus.

T h is devotion is felt w herever th e Bible and sp iritua l ideals touch people’s

lives.4 A m ericans w an t to help Israel because th ey know the m eaning of

2 Congressional Record (Feb. 11, 1954).3 One of the most striking examples of this love for the modern builders of Zion dates

back to 1830 when the Mormon Church, the first indigenous American religious group, in­cluded amongst its articles of faith the belief in the literal restoration of Eretz Yisrael. Later Joseph Smith, its founder, dispatched Orson Hyde, one of his ardent disciples, to Jerusalem, to help facilitate the return of the Jews. Hyde’s prayer, offered on Mt. Olives, and later incorporated as an official prayer in the Mormon ritual, reads like the prayer of a pious Jew. A brief citation will suffice to transmit the mood and character of the entire supplication: “. . . Thou, O Lord, did once move upon the heart of Cyrus to show favor unto Jerusalem and her children. Do Thou also be pleased to inspire the hearts of kings and the powers of the earth to look with a friendly eye toward this place, and with a desire to see Thy righteous purposes executed in relation thereto. Let them know that it is Thy good pleasure to restore the Kingdom unto Israel — raise up Jerusalem as its capital, and constitute her people a distinct nation and government. . . Let that nation or that people who shall take an active part in the behalf of Abraham’s children and in the raising up of Jerusalem find favor in Thy sight . . .”

4 We are told, for example, in Harold Ribalow’s volume on The History of Israel's Postage

MOSHE DAVIS30

Jerusalem . One of th e finest form ulations of the A m erican love for Jerusalem

was presen ted by P residen t P usey of H arv ard in an A m erican Jew ish T e r­

cen ten ary address which he called “A m erica and Je ru sa lem .”

T he Jew ish co n tribu tion to the se ttlem en t and building of th is co u n try

is im p o rtan t, b u t when we have said th is it is no t necessary to add th a t a t th is level of consideration it is no t essentially different from those of

o ther cu ltu ra l groups who were com ing to A m erica a t the sam e tim e. I t

should no t be forgotten or undervalued , b u t it is n o t here th a t the m ost

d istinc tive and m ost valuable co n tribu tion of th e Jew ish people is to be

found. T o ge t a t th is we m ust go back of N ew port and New A m sterdam ,

back of the earlier Jew ish se ttlem en ts in R ussia, G erm any and Spain,

back to a m ore d is ta n t tim e, to th a t long confused period in w hich n o t only w hat we now call W estern C ivilization itself, was form ing in the

ancien t M iddle E ast. For it is n o t in business, nor in m usic, nor in th e

professions, b u t in religion, th a t the Jew ish people have m ade th e ir

g rea tes t con tribu tion bo th here and abroad . . . I have endeavored . . ,

to suggest th a t g rea ter, im m easurable sp iritua l d eb t th a t all men — we

in th is cou n try , and o thers E as t and W est, w hether it be recognized or

no t — owe, and m ust ever owe, to Jerusalem . T h is place, for nearly

th ree thousand years, has been sum m oning us to life — giving acknow l­

edgm ent of our inescapable dependence on G od.5

These are th e cu rren ts of our tim es w hich are shaping A m erican and world

opinion, and from which we can benefit g rea tly in the evolution of our own

new program . In essaying these trends, I am no t unm indful of the co u n te r­

opinion which is w orking aga inst us, and the effect of which, alas, is also clearly

m anifest. B u t I am convinced th a t we have in these construc tive tren d s the

m ore perm anen t m an ifestations of A m erican though t.

I l l

W hat, then is the m easure of our own con tribu tion to E r e t z Y i s r a e l ? W h at

does Israel require of us now m ore th an any th in g else?

T h e a s s u r a n c e t h a t i n A m e r i c a n J e w r y i t h a s a f i r m p a r t n e r i n t h e c r e a t i v e

e n t e r p r i s e o f t h e J e w i s h p e o p l e a n d i n t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n o f t h e J e w i s h F a i t h .

And w hat do we require of ourselves in th is relationship?

T h e f e e l i n g t h a t w e c a n o f f e r t o t h i s p a r t n e r s h i p n o t o n l y o u r m a t e r i a l r e s o u r c e s

b u t o u r s p i r i t u a l s t r e n g t h a s w e l l ; t h e a s s u r a n c e o f o u r a b i l i t y t o g i v e T o r a h t o

I s r a e l a s w e l l a s t o r e c e i v e s p i r i t u a l g u i d a n c e f r o m E re tz Y israel.

In order to achieve these ends, the E r e t z Y i s r a e l program of the C onserva­

tive m ovem ent m ust be based on tw o fundam enta l propositions.

F irst, th a t the g rea test con tribu tion we can m ake to E r e t z Y i s r a e l is to build

an au th en tic , indigenous and crea tive Jew ish com m unity in A m erica based on

Stamps, that Israeli stamps are purchased, in proportion to numbers, more by Christians than by Jews, because of the attraction of Eretz Yisrael and the Biblical themes on the stamps.

5 Publications of the American Jewish Historical Society, Vol. XLV, no. 1 (September, 1955), pp. 1-6. Another address on this theme, quite remarkable for its penetrating thoughtfulness, was delivered in 1953, by the Governor-General of Canada, Vincent Massey, and published by the Canadian Jewish Congress.

3 1OUR SHARE IN ERETZ YISRAEL

the solid foundations of the T rad ito n . As D r. K ap lan w rites in his A N e w

Z i o n i s m : “ Zionism can em erge from its p resen t crisis s treng thened by the

experience of challenge and danger. I t can lead to the fu lfillm ent of the

prophecy th a t 'from Zion shall go fo rth T o ra h ,’ b u t before th e T orah can go

fo rth from Zion it will have to en te r in to Z ionism .” T h is is the beginning of

our ta sk : ac tu a lly to bring T orah in to our lives and in to th e life of Zionism.

T hus, ju s t as Israel has becom e a v ita l fac to r in the recen t in tensification of

Jew ish life in A m erica, so will a flourishing and c r e a t i v e A m erican Jew ry becom e

an im p o rtan t facto r in the cu ltu ra l advancem en t of th e Y i s h u v .

W e m ust n o t be appalled by th e th o u g h t th a t we, too, m ust bring T o rah to

E r e t z Y i s r a e l . Unless th is is our am bition , i t is inconceivable th a t we can ever

have a full share in the L and , nor will we be in a position to m ake a m eaningful

con tribu tion to the to ta li ty of Jew ish life. A m erican Jew ry is accepted in the

counsels of world Jew ry essentially because of its num bers and m ateria l

s tren g th , b u t we shall never m ake a fundam en ta l con tribu tion to the inner

life of w orld Jew ry unless we reo rien t our own lives ab o u t T o rah and its

teachings.

Some challenge those who express a belief in th e c rea tive p o ten tia lities of

A m erican Jew ry : “ D o you believe A m erican Jew ry is B abylonian Jew ry ?”

I answ er th a t the question itself is irre levan t. W ould th a t we should w a n t

to serve the h istoric role of B abylonian Jew ry in re la tion to Israeli Jew ry . W e

would then affirm th a t a t least we aspire to the ach ievem ents of th a t c reative

age.

Y et T o rah should be b ro u g h t to E r e t z Y i s r a e l from A m erican Jew ry if we

w an t Israel to respect us. Ben G urion once m et a group of Iraq i children whom

he w anted to im press w ith th e opportun ities offered them to raise the s tan d ard s

of Israeli life. “W ho was the first S a b r a V \ he asked. T he children sp o n tan e­

ously responded, “A b rah am .” “ N o ,” he rem inded them , “ I t was Isaac.

A braham was an Iraq i, and he b ro u g h t the belief in one G od to Israe l.”

N o t only in ancien t days a t the tim e of A braham , b u t in m odern days, too,

d iaspora com m unities have played a crucial role in shaping the ch a rac te r of

life in E r e t z I s r a e l . T h e whole revival of m odern H ebrew is a phenom enon of

the d iaspora, the creation of E ast-E u ro p ean Jew ry . I t is n o t inconceivable

th a t A m erican Jew ry could teach Israel how the Synagogue m ay be revitalized

in m odern circum stances and in a con tem porary se tting . T h u s we could

bring new m eaning to the personal sp iritua l life of the Jew s in Israel.

T he second prem ise on which our program should be based is personal

religious com m itm ent. A l i y a h , th a t is, se ttlem en t in E r e t z Y i s r a e l , is a w ord

w hich we avoid o u t of th e fear th a t any positive affirm ation of an A m erican

A l i y a h im plies a choice again st A m erica.

W h a t is th e purpose of A l i y a h ?

G enerally , one th in k s of A l i y a h as a p rogram for build ing Israel. T h a t is

obvious! W h a t should be equally obvious is th a t A l i y a h is v ita l to build the

A m erican Jew ish com m unity , to help crea te in A m erica an au th en tic Judaism .

A Jew ish com m unity th a t w an ts to be p a r t of th e m ainstream of the Jew ish

M O S H E D A V I S3 2

tradition should inspire a portion of its num bers to want to go up to Jerusalem ; otherwise it may not succeed in becoming a Jewish com m unity a t all. Yishuv Eretz Yisrael, settlem ent of the Holy Land, is a historic function of all diasporic communities, and the Aliyah of select individuals and groups of settlers has always added to the quality of the Jewish com m unity a t home, precisely because of the religious significance of Eretz Yisrael in Jewish life.

The insight about Yishuv Eretz Yisrael cited in the name of R. H anina — “ the Land of Israel when it is inhabited expands, when it is not inhabited it con­trac ts”6— applies with equal force to the im pact of Aliyah upon diasporic communities. Jewish communities in the diaspora also expand in the dim en­sions of their spiritual life in proportion to their active contact with the Land.

The Aliyah of those individuals, or as Haim Greenberg called them, pil­grims, ascending to Eretz Yisrael out of love for the ideas of Judaism and for the T radition, out of their religious commitment, is the Aliyah we should be proud to achieve. Such pilgrims, coming from America, would be exponents of the American spirit of freedom. They would represent a climax of the American ideal, for such pilgrims will come to Israel with a love of America. They will come as consciously creative forces to a new country in the process of creation. They would relate the American background to the Jewish trad ition , and add a new ingredient to the Israeli amalgam.

This we m ust remem ber: American Jew ry can influence Israel — bu t not from afar! I t will not be difficult for Americans who settle to influence Israeli life. Israel is waiting for them to come.

Our religious com m itm ent to Eretz Yisrael ought to be th a t every Jew iden­tifies himself with the Land and feels p art of it. Those who do not go — for whatever reason — are subject nevertheless to the requirem ents of Jewish life and discipline. We have been given six hundred and thirteen mitzvot. No Jew fulfills all of them. B ut the Jewish people fulfill all of them as a people. T here­fore it is a serious mistake to equate any individual’s given situation or decision a t a particular time with the to tal experience of the entire Jewish community.

We m ust look a t the decision of Aliyah as a collective decision of the Amer­ican Jewish community. American Jewry collectively should adopt Aliyah as a perm anent part of its program and its teachings, ju st as it teaches other mitzvot. We do not know who will go, or whose life will be fulfilled by A liyah , bu t we do know th a t if part of us will be there, we will be there, America will be there. Fulfilled as a religious ideal, Americans who understand the American tradition, will honor those, who through their A liyah , will pioneer in the furtherance of religious brotherhood and world dem ocracy.7

ץ ר א ל . א ר ש מן י שבין בז ה שיו י ל א ע ח מן רוו בז שבין שאין ו ה יו לי א ע ד מ , ג . . טין . 6 א נ״ז, גי7 F o r a n e x c e l l e n t s t a t e m e n t o f t r a d i t i o n a l A m e r ic a n p r e c e d e n t s a n d a t t i t u d e s w h ic h

c a s t l i g h t o n t h i s A m e r ic a - I s r a e l r e la t io n s h ip , s e e : O s c a r H a n d l in , Israel and the Mission of America ( B o s t o n H e b r e w T e a c h e r s C o l le g e P r e s s ) , 1955.

3 3O U R S H A R E I N E R E T Z Y I S R A E L

In order to make concrete the role of the Conservative movement in Eretz Yisrael, a jo in t commission of the United Synagogue, the Rabbinical Assembly and the Seminary, representing the three constituent bodies of the M ovement, was appointed a t the last convention with instructions to draft a program of action in the spirit of our com m itm ent to Eretz Yisrael. Mr. Charles Rosen- garten, President of the United Synagogue, is chairm an of the Commission. The immediate projects described are based on the m emoranda drafted by Dr. Simon Greenberg.8 While it m ay take some years to achieve them , these projects are nevertheless conceived as a series of first steps.

The Eretz Yisrael program of the Conservative movement, calls for the following specific projects:

A. The Establishment of the Seminary Center in Jerusalem

Plans for this project were first discussed in conversations between Dr. Finkelstein and Prem ier Ben Gurion in Jerusalem , in 1952. Mr. Ben Gurion, M r. Sharett, and other leaders of the S ta te enthusiastically endorsed these plans, and see in them infinite possibilities for the development of the kind of America-Israel relationship we all seek.

The first building of the Seminary Center to be built on land allocated by the Jewish N ational Fund will be a pnim iya , a studen ts’ residence hall. The pnim iya will be the home for students of the Seminary who will be studying in Eretz Yisrael, and whose studies will be credited toward the requirem ents of rabbinic ordination. The Faculty of the Seminary looks forward to the day when every rabbi and teacher prepared by the Seminary will receive a portion of his training in the Holy Land. I t is indispensable for any spiritual leader whose task it is to in terpret the Tradition to receive p art of his training in the Land where the prophets and ancient rabbis taught. I t is also indispensable th a t future American spiritual leaders share contem porary spiritual experiences with fellow Jews in Eretz Yisrael. When the time comes th a t every rabbi re­ceives such training, new avenues of cultural and spiritual reciprocity will develop so th a t those students will return and influence their own students and congregants to seek some form of personal identification with Eretz Yisrael.

The Residence Hall will be open to other qualified students from America and abroad. Plans include the construction of a students' synagogue, an auditorium and a library. The library will specialize in Rabbinic studies, in theology and philosophy; and in the American section, it will lay special emphasis on the contribution of American theologians, philosophers, and scholars.

8 I w a n t f u r t h e r t o r e c o r d t h a t in t h i s s e c t i o n o f t h e p a p e r I h a v e d r a w n n o t o n ly o n t h e

c o n t e n t o f D r . G r e e n b e r g ’s s t a t e m e n t s , b u t a ls o o n s o m e o f t h e p h r a s in g . T h e f u l l r e c o r d is

a v a i l a b l e in t h e f i l e s o f t h e C o m m is s io n .

I V

M O S H E D A V I S3 4

The Seminary Center will bring into person-to-person contact the young men and women who will be the teachers of the future generations of American and Israeli Jews. I t is also contem plated th a t the Center will make a contri­bution to the fundam ental task of building understanding between the people of America and the citizens of Israel and the N ear E ast generally. This is the crux of the program Dr. Finkelstein outlined to Israeli leaders, and to which they responded so warmly. American students, graduate and under­graduate, and American faculty members, living a t this Center for a t least one year could do much to in terpret, in word and act, American democratic institutions to the people of Israel, and the spirit of the people of Israel to America.

B. Pilgrimages to Israel

Basic to any cultural relationship is a personal relationship. M embers of the U nited Synagogue, in all of its groupings, are to be encouraged to go to Eretz Yisrael for long or short-term periods. Only in this way can the Jews of this country be witness to the “miracle of redem ption,” to the creative mood of the Land and to the renaissance of Hebrew culture.9 These pilgrimages will be directed and serviced through our Center in Eretz Yisrael.

Even before the to ta l program is initiated, the N ational Youth Commis­sion of the United Synagogue with the cooperation of the Jewish Agency is conducting a six-week study tour for its members. Unquestionably, this project will grow from year to year, and we see in this new undertaking a significant development in the Jewish education of high school and college youth. We congratulate the United Synagogue Y outh, who through their program called “ Building Spiritual Bridges” inaugurate the first group pilgrimage of our movement.

C. Scholarly and Intellectual Exchange

The natural concom itants of this personal exchange will be an exchange of ideas. Israeli life and thought as they affect Jewish values will influence American students and visitors. In turn , American thought will be brought to Israel by men and women who love America and who are deeply rooted in its life and institutions. N ot only American thought and culture will be brought to Israel; the experience of American Jewish life and creativity will also be shared with Israelis.

9 F o r a n a n a ly s i s o f t h e r e s u lt s o f s u c h p e r s o n a l c o n t a c t w i t h Eretz Yisrael, s e e J a c o b L e s t - s c h i n s k v ’s a r t i c le “ C e n t e r - T r e n d s in D ia s p o r a J e w is h L i f e ” in Current Events in Jewish Life ( A p r i l - S e p t e m b e r , 1955) , p p . 17- 27. S e e a ls o t h e “ C a ll t o P i lg r i m a g e ” i s s u e d b y t h e A s h -

k e n a z ic a n d S e p h a r d ic C h ie f R a b b is in I s r a e l , Hadcar (2 I y a r , 5716) , p . 431.

3 5O U R S H A R E I N E R E T Z Y I S R A E L

An outstanding example of the gift American Jewish scholarship has made to the Holy Land is the recently published monum ental com m entary on the Tosefta by Professor Saul Lieberman, Dean of the Seminary Faculty. In accepting the first copy from the hands of United S tates Ambassador Lawson, President Ben Zvi said: “ I t does great credit to the United States, and to American Jew ry in particular th a t the critical edition of the Tosefta has been prepared and published in Am erica.” And then President Ben Zvi under­scored the salient aspect of the event: “This new edition . . . could strengthen Israel’s links with the past and contribute toward the rebuilding of the historic homeland of the Jew s.”

D. Support of Religious Institutions

In our own pnim iya synagogue we will conduct ourselves as we do a t home because we w ant our students and laity who come to Jerusalem to feel com­pletely a t home. B ut we shall not come to Israel as propagandists. I t is not for American Jews to interfere with the normal development of the religious life and institutions of Israel. I t is not our purpose to introduce controversy. As in American Jewish history, so in the Israeli present, the living people will produce living answers. And their right to do so m ust be inviolate. I t is our purpose to offer economic assistance to religious institutions w ithout requiring conformity with our particular point of view. This is in keeping with the American practice of unity within diversity. We will help further all Israeli institutions aiming to make the Synagogue a vital force in the intellectual and personal life of the individual and the community.

E. Implementing the Program

I t is estim ated th a t a million and a half Jews in America are associated with the Conservative congregations in the United S tates and Canada. The financing of these projects is so designed that no one can be denied the opportunity to share in our program. Therefore the United Synagogue has issued a call for a volunteer tax of two dollars per year to be self-imposed by every member in every constituent synagogue. This fund is to be expended on the projects described above. In time there will be created an annual fund to support and enlarge the Eretz Yisrael program of the Conservative movement. (The capital funds to be raised for the buildings will be the gift of a small group of people who understand the scope of the program and its potential im pact on American and Israeli Jewry.)

* * * *

Every member of the Conservative movement is given an opportunity by this fourfold program to participate in the establishm ent of our “House of

H E R T Z E L F I S H M A N3 6

Life and Learning” in Eretz YisraeL Each of us m ay now, if we will, perform an act of K inyan , an act of acquisition, a declaration of faith in Israel and in America.

As the word of the Lord came to Jerem iah to claim his portion of land in A nathoth : — לקנות הגאולה משפט לך כי — The right of redemption is also ours to acquire.

This is our share in Eretz YisraeL

A NEW Z I O N I S M

H ertzel F ishman

A commentary on contem porary Zionism, m otivated by a reading of Dr. Mordecai K aplan’s book, A New Zionism*

A t i t s last convention, the Rabbinical Assembly of America voted to implement a m ajor thesis of Dr. Kaplan, as expressed in his series of lectures compiled by the Theodor Herzl Foundation, entitled A New Zionism. This thesis is the need to reaffirm the concept of Jewish Peoplehood, through a formal covenant in Jerusalem, by representatives of organized Jewish bodies the world over.

While the “covenant” idea is perhaps the principal practical suggestion offered in his A New Zionism , Dr. Kaplan analyzes in his own inimitable m anner the over-all confusion which reigns today in the ideological and philosophical nature of the Jewish group. Such confusion is due to the failure to comprehend Judaism as a continuously evolving religious civilization. Instead, one body of Jews, the Israelis, view Judaism predominantly in term s of a chauvinistic political nationalism; another group of Jews, the euthenasian assimilationists in the Diaspora, view it in terms of an ambiguous set of beliefs and ethical principles which most of them do not practice; while the mass of Orthodox Jews, though quite heterodox in practice, identify Judaism only with the traditions handed down to them by their parents who lived their lives in confined Jewish environs, uninfluenced by the currents of enlighten­m ent and democracy. Jews who comprehend Judaism as a dynamic religious civilization, centered around a vital universal Jewish People, are not part of the m ainstream of contem porary Jewish thought.

Zionism has always had as its principal goal the meaningful preservation of the Jewish People. I t has sought to atta in this goal a t various stages in Jewish history through a special emphasis on one or another means of survival. A t

R a b b i F i s h m a n is t h e s p ir i t u a l le a d e r o f T e m p le S h a lo m , G r e e n w ic h , C o n n .

* T h e o d o r H e r z l F o u n d a t i o n , N e w Y o r k , 1955.

3 7A N E W Z I O N I S M

one stage in our history, Zionism was expressed in the messianic idea of redem ption; a t another time in the Jewish cultural revival of the Haskalah period. W ith the growth of modern nationalism, Zionism expressed itself in the building of a political state; with the advent of modern anti-Semitism, through rescue and philanthropic projects in Palestine and Israel.

Today, Dr. Kaplan suggests, having achieved in Israel a natural base of operations, a society whose m ajority of citizens are Jews, Zionism should become th a t platform which enrolls Jews in a crusade for the salvation of mankind. The instrum ent for this crusade is th a t body of Jews willing to reaffirm its will to live as an exemplary People, and whose spiritual center is the modern S tate of Israel.

The program of Dr. K aplan’s “new Zionism” is threefold: one, to formally reconstitute the universal Jewish people through a covenant of loyalty to its steadily evolving religious civilization; two, to reclaim and rebuild the S ta te of Israel with the aim of making it an exemplary society of spiritual power and ethical greatness for the entire world; and three, to encourage and foster the continuous development of Judaism as a philosophy of salvation (i. e., making the most of one’s inherent potentialities), or, in Dr. K aplan’s words, furthering “the creative expansion of T orah .”

The m ajor contribution of the book is the due emphasis placed on the spiritual rebirth of the Jewish people, rather than on the Land of Israel, as the end goal of Zionism. I t correctly delineates the S tate of Israel as being only the indispensable means to achieve this end, bu t pointedly sets up a new perspective of Israel in relation to the more basic theme of Jewish survival. In view of the overemphasis placed on political Zionism and philanthropic Zionism for so m any years, this emphasis in itself is a “new Zionism.”

This “new Zionism” has two far-reaching corollaries: one, it re־asserts unequivocally th a t the Land of Israel, its policies and destiny, is the rightful concern of the Jewish people whether or not they live in Israel; and two, it points out th a t Zionism is a particular way of life for Jews everywhere, whether they live in Israel or in the Diaspora.

The first proposition infers th a t a substantial degree of influence can be exerted by representatives of the Jewish people whose organized natural groupings have ratified the Peoplehood Covenant, on the policies and practices of the S ta te of Israel as they may affect the Jewish people everywhere. This means th a t the term “sovereignty” as far as Israel is concerned, cannot be understood solely in the political sense accepted by the international commu­nity, bu t m ust be mcdified by the interests of Jewish Peoplehood. One m ust differentiate between those acts of political sovereignty affecting only the Israel S ta te and other acts which have a direct bearing upon the status and future of the Jewish people throughout the world.

Jewish Peoplehood has a sovereignty all of its own, a spiritual sovereignty. The Israel society shares in this spiritual sovereignty as long as it too is part of this Peoplehood. Conversely, representatives of the preservationist bodies

4

of Jews throughout the world have the right and opportunity to influence the policies of the Israel society as they affect Jewish Peoplehood.

Ambassadors of Jewish Peoplehood

Once the Peoplehood Covenant is signed by representatives of national Jewish organizations, their spokesmen would reside in Israel as “am bassadors,” representing to th a t Governm ent and to the Israel society, the views and in ter­ests of the Jewish people living in the Diaspora. I t would be in the interests both of Israel and the Diaspora th a t such ambassadors be conversant in the Hebrew language and Jewish culture, have a sym pathetic understanding of the structure and problems of Israel society, and be willing to reside in Israel with their families for a lengthy period of time. They would circulate among Israeli legislators, educators, correspondents, and other molders of public opinion, address Israeli audiences, publish articles in the local press — all of these activities aiming to make the opinions of large units of the Jewish people outside Israel known to the Israel public. The ultim ate decision regarding any Israel policy or legislation would rest w ith the citizens and government of Israel, bu t it would be up to the representatives of preservationist Jewry to try to influence th a t society on m atters affecting Jewish Peoplehood.

In turn, these ambassadors of Jewish Peoplehood would serve as reporters and analyzers of the Israel scene to their respective Jewish bodies in the Diaspora. In these capacities they would have a great im pact on the content of Jewish life in the Diaspora, for they would “ feed” and in terpret for the Diaspora the newly created patterns and values of modern collective Jewish life which Israel alone, by virtue of its predom inantly Jewish population, can produce.

The scope of interests of these ambassadors cannot be defined a priori any more than can the scope of activities of any diplomatic representative to a foreign sovereign state. Diplomats on-the-spot create their own degree of influence based upon their own personalities and the circumstances existing in the country of their accreditation. But it might be helpful to suggest th a t the representatives of Jewish Peoplehood residing in Israel should not be concerned with purely domestic issues affecting Israelis only, such as public works, social welfare policies, or local tax problems. They should be involved in and seek to influence those areas of Israeli life, affecting not only the populace of Israel, bu t the Jewish people throughout the world. Two such spheres of their legitimate concern — education and religion — might be cited as examples.

I t is of basic significance to the concept of Jewish Peoplehood th a t the Israeli government inculcate into its school children not only a love and loyalty for the physical land of Israel and its government, bu t also for the Jewish people the world over. Today, unfortunately, Israeli youth have a negative and condescending attitude toward Jews not living in Israel, viewing

3 8 H E R T Z E L F I S H M A N

3 9A N E W Z I O N I S M

such Jews as inferior to themselves if not outright disloyal to the Jewish ideal of national redemption.

It is morally defensible for representatives of Jewish Peoplehood to press the government of Israel to develop its educational program in Israeli schools within the framework of Jewish Peoplehood, for only then could we expect to cement genuine bonds of brotherhood between Israeli and Diaspora Jewries. Only then would Israel’s participation in the Peoplehood covenant be truly realized. The im plementation of such an educational policy rests with the Israel government; the responsibility of influencing th a t government rests with preservationist Jews outside of Israel.

In defense of Jewish Peoplehood, we are under equal pressure to seek to influence religious life in Israel. How we should go about doing this is not the subject of this article. W hat m ust be openly recognized is the need to abandon coyness and stop protesting th a t we have no such intentions. We have an interest in modifying religious thought patterns and practices in Israel, for we feel th a t a philosophy of Judaism as an evolving religious civilization has something definite to contribute toward rectifying the religious vacuum or outright climate of antagonism toward religion prevailing in Israel today.

Our purpose in influencing Israeli religious life is quite selfish. I t is not aimed a t bringing something in from w ithout for the benefit of Israelis, though this m otivation may also be considered morally valid. The vested interests which seek to perpetuate a rigid religious pattern in modern Israel, imported lock, stock and barrel from east-Europe, or from the even more cloistered Levant society, will have to yield sooner or later before the necessity of satis- fying the urgent religious needs of spiritually starved Jews in th a t country. We would not be imposing a new religious pattern, bu t ra ther dem onstrating the versatility of Jewish religious thought and practice for Israelis to choose from if they so desired.

Our prim ary interest in this subject, however, affects our own religious welfare here in the Diaspora. W hereas Israeli Jews may have other legitimate media to ensure their continued survival as a distinct group w ithout the absolute immediate necessity of Jewish religious development, we Jews in the Diaspora have none of these cementing nationalistic media and view modern religious growth in Israel as a prim ary need for our survival as Jews in the Diaspora.

Though, indeed, we will develop our Jewish life within the framework of circumstances, it is wishful thinking to hope th גלות a t modern, yet authentic, Jewish religious values and practices can be initiated and flourish successfully in a predominantly non-Jewish society. Similarly, we would be misdirecting our innermost hopes if we did not look eagerly and expectantly to the Israel society for the normal “expansion of T orah ,” for the natural revival of Juda- ism. The religious and cultural fruits of such a Jewish renaissance in Israel are bound to give in the future, as they have in the recent past, new direction and meaningful content to our own “Jewishness” in the Diaspora, thereby strengthening our own chances of group survival in a challenging spiritually

H E R T Z E L F I S H M A N40

non-Jewish world. When we say תורה תצא מציון כי , we mean first and foremost for ourselves, as Jews living in the Diaspora. The uncertain future of the “Jewishness” of Jewish Peoplehood makes our entry into Israel’s religious life a necessity, not a by-product of our Zionism, for only if we plant the seeds of historic Judaism — modified by the tenets of enlightenment and democracy— in Israel, can Israel society nurture a vital Judaism reflecting the spiritual needs of Jews in tent on remaining gratified Jews in our modern world.

Some people m ay challenge the right of preservationist Jewish bodies in the Diaspora to send its ambassadors to Israel, and seek there to influence Israeli policy as it affects the future of the Jewish people throughout the world. Such people, I feel, have not fully comprehended the unique nature of Jewish Peoplehood.

T h a t we have a moral right to express ourselves in the affairs of the Yishuv is implied in the moral obligations th a t Jewish history, our Jewish conscious- ness, and the sovereign state of Israel have imposed upon us in supporting th a t s tate economically and otherwise. Yet, I think we will all agree th a t morally there can be no taxation w ithout representation, just as in fact there can be no secure S tate of Israel w ithout the continuous support of the גולה.

T h a t we have a legal right to send ambassadors of Jewish Peoplehood to Israel is formalized in the still existing international status of the Jewish Agency for Palestine and in the law promulgated by the Israel Knesset, giving legal status in Israel to the World Zionist Organization. I t is our thesis, how- ever, th a t the present structure and policies of the World Zionist Organization and the Jewish Agency do not express these legal rights satisfactorily, and m ust undergo far-reaching changes, in the interests of Jewish Peoplehood.

The Jewish Agency, for all intents and purposes, is an executive body representing Israeli Jews, though it does have some members, elected by the World Zionist Congress, who represent Zionist organizations outside of Israel. However, all of the la tter reside abroad, while the day-to-day work of the Agency, including the allocation of United Jewish Appeal funds, is done by the Israeli members who are spokesmen for Israeli political parties.

Such a Jewish Agency does not reflect the interests and views of preser- vationist Jewry in the Diaspora, anymore than does the World Zionist Con- gress, based, as it is, on a spurious pattern of “Shekel democracy,” allowing for twice as m any delegates from Israeli political parties as from Zionist bodies in the Diaspora. The fact th a t large bodies of “non-Zionists” (whatever this term means in the current Zionist vocabulary) are not represented a t all a t these Congresses, merely compounds the need to change the existing institu- tional relationship between Israel and Diaspora Jewry.

Implications for American Jewish Organizations

A New Zionism carries m any implications affecting organized Jewish organizations, including national religious movements, here in the United States. The first sphere to be affected would be th a t of educational policy in

41A N E W Z I O N I S M

our schools, pulpits and meeting halls. We m ust liberate ourselves from old Zionist thinking and clichés, and our people m ust be inculcated with an appreciation and responsibility for new Zionist behavior.

In our teachings and preachings we m ust emphasize the difference between Zionists and pro-Israelis. To the former, the S tate of Israel is only a necessary means to preserve and strengthen Jewish Peoplehood; the end is the Jewish people. To the latter, the S ta te of Israel is an end in itself. To the former, Zionism is basically a spiritual concept, affecting one’s own self and entire family — values, thought patterns, home practices and com m unity interests. To the latter, involvement in Israeli causes is essentially an impersonal political or philanthropic relationship — for the benefit of others in Israel, not for themselves in the Diaspora.

We m ust make it clear to our people th a t contributions of money and time to Israel causes do not necessarily make a person a Zionist, anymore than does residence in Israel itself. Only those who actively participate in the renais- sanee of the Jewish People and its unique civilization, acknowledging Israel as an indispensible medium in this process, are Zionists, w hether they live in Israel or in the Diaspora.

As rabbis, we owe it to our congregations to clarify for them the historic spiritual relationship between the People of Israel and the Land of Israel. We are obligated to reinterpret for them the meaning of the prayers, customs and holidays which are Land-of-Israel centered, and which form a m ajor part of our religious tradition. W hat should this tradition mean to Jews in the Diaspora? Surely the need for reinterpretation becomes a major challenge for the American rabbinate.

In the sphere of com m unity activ ity A New Zionism compels us to re- think our approach to fund raising campaigns for Israeli causes. We should guide our own congregants to divert some of their contributions for Israel in general, to particular projects and programs in th a t country, directed and supervised by our religious movements in particular. The orthodox Rab- binical Council is sponsoring the הדרום ישיבת , the Reform movement the School of Archeology in Jerusalem, and the United Synagogue, the פנימיה project in Israel’s capital city, a venture aimed a t bringing direct benefits to the future teachers and rabbis of Conservative Judaism in this country. But in w hat way can American religious Jew ry directly benefit the citizens of Israel? Let us here consider such a project. Again, it concerns education in Israel.

M any people, including Israelis, are disturbed over the excessive levantin- ism which prevails in the Israel society today to the detrim ent of western spiritual values. Probably, the best place to effect a change in the general spiritual climate of Israel is in the schools of th a t country, with a single elem entary and secondary school serving as a model. The graduates of such a school can have a tremendous im pact upon the Israel society a t large, as have the graduates of the Reali School in Haifa, or of Gymnasia Herzliah in Tel Aviv. Any one of the organized American Jewish religious movements could sponsor

H E R T Z E L F I S H M A N4 2

a model school in Israel in which a substantial number of highly qualified teachers, educated in the values and civic habits of western democracy a t its best, and sharing a dynamic philosophy of historic Judaism, would teach. Such educational goals and practices, currently deficient in the curriculum of Israeli schools, when integrated with the fervor of Zionist idealism, would serve as a more wholesome basis for the country’s scholastic program.

Bringing such a program into the Israel society is not a kulturkampf in the sense of foisting upon th a t country a pattern of thought and behavior alien to Zionism or objectionable to its citizens. Most Israelis have never been exposed to a m ature civic way of life, particularly because of the non- democratic nature of their countries of origin. When Israeli leaders clamor for Americans to come to Israel, they do so not because they primarily need our technical know-how (as some American Zionist organizations rationalize), bu t because they realize th a t their country is in urgent need of a strong dose of American civic and democratic values.

Such values are not forms of behavior, economic, political or social; they consist of ethical principles of behavior, such as tolerance, fair play and good faith, civic responsibility, respect for law, a reverence for God and for religion in its diverse forms, non-party (political) orientation in schools and youth clubs, a loyal opposition in parliament, non-discrimination in labor and m anagement policies, upholding the dignity and rights of the individual as a hum an being rather than because of membership in a political party, or belonging to social or economic class. Surely no fair-minded person having the future of both the S ta te of Israel and the Jewish people a t heart, can object to such im portations into Israel, and the best medium for their dissemination among the Israeli citizenry is the school system of th a t country.

Since the establishm ent of the state, standards in the Israeli schools have been lowered to meet the tremendous influx of im m igrant children. There are few good schools in the country due to a gross lack of teachers, textbooks, and physical facilities. Nor is there an overall philosophy of citizenship responsibility based on love for S tate, Jewish people, and hum anity a t large. M ost of the secondary schools in the country are private, and a model school (or schools) sponsored by anyone of the preservationist Jewish bodies in this country would be most welcome by large segments of the Israel population. A dorm itory attached to such a secondary school could be of tremendous value for scores of Americans and other Diaspora children, as was the dorm i­tory of the Reali School of Haifa for hundreds of Jewish children from all parts of the world between the two world wars.

“Kibbush Hakhilot”

“New Zionist” thinking m ust also have a profound im pact upon the pro­gram of activities in our local communities. This is not the place to enum erate the m any phases of such a projected program, bu t its over-all philosophy should be clear: to bring forth as much of a genuine “Jewish” revival in

4 3A N E W Z I O N I S M

American Jewry as possible, through Afrad H a-‘am ’s strategy of הקהילות כיבוש , capturing the communities, their schools, programs, fundraising bodies and pulpits to advance the purpose of the Jewish renaissance.

P u t negatively, this campaign is one against Jewish lethargy, Jewish ignorance, and assimilation in its m any disguised and subtle forms. I t may not be pleasant or popular to wage such a war, bu t the leaders of American Jewish religious life, especially its rabbis, will have to lead their congregations along new paths of meaningful Jewish survival, or else forfeit their right to Jewish leadership.

Local laymen may well succeed in diminishing the influence of an individual rabbi, bu t it is doubtful whether the American rabbinate as a whole, or even the bulk of its members, once it decides to take a stand on the crucial issues of meaningful Jewish preservation, and guides and directs its membership on these issues, would be vulnerable and helpless in the face of an opposition born of confused values and lack of Jewish education and knowledge. As individuals and as a group, rabbis have a tremendous potential instrum ent in their hands — their knowledge, their prestige and their congregations — with which to stim ulate thinking on m atters of vital Jewish concern, locally, nationally and internationally.

As one goes about the country, one finds th a t the members of the rabbinate have fallen into a serious pitfall, in relation to positive Jewish endeavors. They have bowed — once again with exceptions — to the determ ination of the Jewish laity to keep the rabbi out of effective positions of leadership in Jewish public affairs, particularly in fund-allocating policy bodies. By and large our task as rabbis a t public functions has become limited to rendering the invoca- tion, or if other rabbinic colleagues also share the program, the benediction. The opinion is being formed in this country th a t the rabbi’s role is one of an agreeable functionary, a m arry-and-bury technician rather than a policy molder and spiritual leader.

Rabbis should actively seek to occupy key positions of leadership in the Jewish community, particularly in the allocation of United Jewish Appeal funds for domestic purposes. They m ust ensure th a t the bulk of such funds be directed to fostering the Jewish renaissance in this country, to advancing the purposes of Zionism.

If the rabbis do not educate and guide our congregants as to w hat does and w hat does not take priority in the ladder of Jewish preservation here in the Diaspora, who will? Are we to leave the allocation of public community funds in the hands of vested interests whose “Jewishness” lies exclusively in m ortar and brick projects, most of them bearing “non-sectarian” imprimatures? Who in the Jewish community — if not the rabbis — will ensure the financial support for the Jewish renaissance, definite Jewish “sectarian” goals, projects of higher Jewish learning, progressive all-day Hebrew “prep” schools, Jewish- content camps, meaningfully Jewish adult retreats; creative Hebrew painting, sculpture, and crafts, drama, music and dance, literature and poetry, hymns and prayers depicting Jewish values and motifs; books in the English language

H E R T Z E L F I S H M A N4 4

portraying for our American Jewish youth and adults the spiritual values of the הגנה, the bravery and idealism of the חלוצים, the pragmatic and beautiful religious pattern of ועבודה תורה ; or Hebraic studies in our colleges and uni- versities, responsible Anglo-Jewish weeklies seeking to interpret and guide — not only to amuse — their readers; meaningful Jewish program m aterial for our nursery and religious schools, for our m en’s clubs and sisterhoods and for the local units of national organizations and “Jewish” community centers.

Affirming the Democratic “Golah”

A m ajor contribution of the “New Zionism” to the Jewish scene is its ideological affirmation of the possibility of meaningful Jewish preservation in a democratic Diaspora. This pragmatic approach to Jewish life sets aside the pessimism of הגולה שוללי as to Jewish survival outside of Israel. B ut note the key words in this new Zionist realism — “possibility” and “dem ocratic.” The term “possibility” means th a t only those Jews who deliberately and personally pursue the Jewish renaissance through the daily practice of definite Zionist can achieve it. Such a goal is not easily attainable, not w ,מצוות ithout personal sacrifice nor the adoption of a unique pattern of family living, and certainly not w ithout swimming against the tide of conformity in our society. Only those who will it, can reach it. B ut democracy allows us to will it!

Even so it would be wrong not to adm it our Israeli brethren’s contention th a t this m inority of Zionists, even in a democratic Diaspora, cannot be as naturally Jewish, as Jews living am idst their own m ajority culture in Israel. Such a claim m ust be granted, for it is much easier and far more normal to be part of the Jewish renaissance in Israel than it is in the United States. But this is the price th a t American Zionists are apparently prepared to pay for the opportunity of living in two civilizations. We may not be as exclusively and creatively Jewish as the Israelis, bu t we m ay well be as Jewish spiritually, in our sense of values, in our practical idealism. And we may have the additional opportunity of enriching Judaism by slow osmosis of western democratic values into the ancient Jewish blood stream, a modern application of של יפיותו

שם באהלי יפת .Ju st because the S tate of Israel comprises a Jewish m ajority, it does not

automatically guarantee the preservation and the modern re-creation of Jewish values any more than does W illiamsburg in Brooklyn. The term can be a גלות physical one or a psychological one. I t is entirely conceivable th a t Zionists in a democratic Diaspora, while residing physically in גלות, live in Zion psycho- logically and spiritually; whereas Jews who physically reside in Zion can be living psychologically and spiritually in the גלות. We m ust always distinguish between Zion the ideal and Zion the reality, indeed always striving to make the reality the ideal. But if Israel the reality will ever be found wanting in fulfilling its historic pivotal role in the Jewish renaissance; if she fails to provide the necessary cultural and spiritual gratification for Jewish Peoplehood — Zion

4 5O U R M O V E M E N T A N D T H E S T A T E O F I S R A E L

will continue to remain only the ideal to be pursued by preservationist Jews the world over, as it has since the destruction of the second Jewish Common­wealth.

Zionism, then, is an ideology spearheaded by the Israel society, whose purpose it is to enrich hum anity through the preservation of the Jewish people. I t is a program to further the re-creation of Jewish values and strengthen the loyalties of Jews to their people’s unique civilization. I t is as much a goal for Israeli Jews as for Diaspora Jews. This has been expressed on numerous occasions by leading Israeli thinkers, including the present Prime M inister.

I t behooves the Rabbinical Assembly of America, the one national rabbinic group in the United S tates which has consistently and officially viewed Zionism and Israel as cardinal planks in its philosophy of Judaism , to initiate, along with other similarly minded bodies, a reformulation of Zionist goals and techniques, both in thought and in deed. Several of the ideas suggested by Dr. Kaplan in his A New Zionism , may well serve as the spring­board for such a refreshing ideological offensive.

OUR MOV E ME N T AND THE STATE OF I SRAEL

J oseph P. Sternstein

I t would be good a t the outset of our discussion to survey, with our m ind’s eye, the vast and m ajestic panoram a of selfless Jewish effort dedicated to the upbuilding of a Jewish Homeland. Careful understanding of this erstwhile achievement, placed in stereoscopic perspective against current contributory endeavors for Israel, m ay enable us to chart a fruitful road for Conservative Judaism in Israel.

Until 1948 contributions from world Jewry for the Yishuv could be classified into three broad categories: finances, socio-political ideas and people. These three routes of contribution, to be sure, were not reflective of disparate m otiva­tion or action, b u t emerged as it were from one ideological chrysalis: the need and will to build a “publicly-recognized, legally-secured Jewish H om eland.” As the momentum of the Zionist movement picked up speed and dynamic power, the three activ ity channels alternated in triggering propulsive spurts of progress and advance. There were moments in Zionist history, as the move­m ent swept on in spate, when all three joined in pouring physical provender in equal torrents into the enlarging dimensions of the Yishuv’s growth.

Financially, such state-building projects as the Keren Kayem eth, Keren Hayesod, United Palestine Appeal, Bonds for Israel — endeavors which activated all ranks and all s tra ta of Jewish public support — rendered incal­

J O S E P H P. S T E R N S T E I N4 6

culably great support to the nascent Jewish Homeland. Jews figuratively emptied their pockets in a display of altruism th a t was in adm irable dispro- portion to the philanthropic record of their non-Jewish neighbors among whom they dwelt. W ith each dollar donated, the Jew ’s stake in the soil of his spiritual homeland was driven ever more deeply. Thus for m any Jews, who could never hope to visit Israel and personally witness the “portion of their labor,” this stake became inextricable. And noteworthily, they gave willingly and generously while consigning to others the responsibility of determining the disbursem ent of their donations. This was a true אמת של חסד . Of course, such blind giving encased within the shell of generosity pregnant seeds of dis- service to Israel as well as to themselves, seeds which eventually sprouted into some of the entangling underbrush vexing the ideological course of world Zionism today. Nevertheless, regardless of ideological nuances, their philan- thropy was characteristic of stalw art devotion to a hallowed ideal.

The second avenue of Jewish contribution to the upbuilding of the Jewish Homeland was the transmission of socio-political ideas. We deliberately use the word “ transm ission,” for with the probable exception of A. D. Gordon’s philosophy, the socio-economic-political ideas which permeate the complex of Israeli life today were originally conceived in the womb of foreign lands, developed and m atured within the corpus of foreign politics and, finally, grafted onto the organism of the Palestinian Jewish society. The range of party systems and their ideologies had their roots in diasporan soil, and by and large, their transference to Palestine represented the earnest desire of their ideological votaries to pu t them into practice in an ideal, “controlled” terri- tory over which they m aintained hegemony. I t is quite evident th a t even the ideological modus vivendi, the pattern of political mannerisms, parliam entary behavior and action programs worked out by Israeli parties with each other, depicts a microcosmic replica of the broad relationships existing between similar ideological factions throughout the world.

Finally, the most protean and glorious avenue of contribution was the hum an element. W hat people! This people, crowned by the aureole of im- m ortality, wrested their destiny out of the tenacious clutches of a grimly un- yielding fate. Today, still, the spirit of “ils ne passerons pas” is the driving impulse of the Israeli: too far and too much have we travelled, this is the last ditch; we have had too m any “St. Louis’s ,” drifting jetsam like on the inter- national waterways, journeying their dreary and dolorous way, unwanted and rebuffed; our memories are surfeited by the haunting spectres of too m any harrowing Transdniestrias . . . These are the people who today man the ram parts of a beleaguered Israel, whose planted gardens have inched their green promontories into the no-m an’s land of forbidding crags and m alignant marshes.

Let us a ttem p t a t this point a cursory historical generalization. Can we not discern here a single motif infusing the spirit of all of these contributions? These were gifts (I use the term in a m etaphorical sense), which, in the first instance as in the financial and hum an spheres, were transferred in fee simple

4 7O U R M O V E M E N T A N D T H E S T A T E O F I S R A E L

by the donor to the recipients to have and to hold forever, or, in the second instance as in the realm of the transport of ideas, was seized by the recipients and syncretistically blended, adapted and assimilated to their new life in the Yishuv — all were gifts and bequests predicated on the nihilistic conviction th a t life for the beneficiaries in their native lands was irretrievably impossible.

These three avenues, by and large, were identified with the physical trans- ference of Jews to Palestine, later Israel, and were aspiringly oriented to am eliorate the physical lot of the Jews there. They were designed to benefit and improve life in the Yishuv exclusively and were in no way pointed to the enhance- ment of Jewish life outside of Israel.

These, then, comprised the first broad category of diasporan contributions. Actuated by vastly different m otivations, however, were world Jew ry’s con- tributions in the area of culture. These consisted essentially in the founding of institutions. Let us, for analytical purposes, select three salient illustrations and determ ine their original purposes and their consequent evolution in reality.

Illustrative of the first type is the Hebrew University. As originally con- ceived, the University was to be prim arily a radiating center of Jewish scholarly achievement, shedding its aura and lustre with equal splendor on the Jews outside of the Homeland as well as those living within the Yishuv. Only secondarily was it to become, prosaically, an institution of higher academic status for the Israeli high school graduate. W ith undeniable recognition of its academic attainm ents, it cannot, in all honesty as yet be said to have realized its original design.

There is a second type of cultural institution created by diasporan Jewry, and although new, is gradually becoming the prototype for an enlarging effort. I refer to the Z. O. A. House in Tel Aviv, where the m ajor emphasis is placed on the system atic and deliberate insemination of foreign, especially American, culture into the Israeli environment. We can expect th a t even though the Z. O. A. House will gear its approach to suit the Israeli cultural climate, desires and needs, the fact th a t it lies within the complete control of the Zionist Organization of America assures closer adherence to its avowed and original objective. Still, definitive conclusions concerning its effect on Israel would be quite premature.

The various Yeshivoth, academies and centers of religious learning con- stitu te the third type of cultural contribution initiated and sustained by world Jewry. Even though the Yishuv is abundantly, even embarrassingly, endowed with a plethora of such institutions, they have as yet made no notable con- tribution or impact, either within Israeli Jewry or on the תפוצות. There are many ambitious schemes apparently in the offing, b u t beyond filling some columns in the Yiddish press, very little definable is as yet extant.

W hat is evident in this second m ajor area of contribution to the upbuilding of the Homeland is a divergence from a thoroughly nihilistic conception of the Diaspora in toto or in parts. I t reflects, even though not in clearly stroked

J O S E P H P. S T E R N S T E I N48

measures, the yearning for the realization of a רוחני מרכז , the spiritual center. The effort in the cultural realm extract with greater success the contrapunctal resonance of a spiritually blended and harmonious Jewry, yet the acute ear will still discern a dissonance, a discordance which has still not been obviated even by this mode of diasporan-Israeli relationship.

This, as I see it, is the nettlesome question: W herein do we wish to intro- duce Jewish themes, coincidentally born on foreign soil, into the culture of Israel, and wherein do we wish to introduce foreign, i. e. non-Jewish themes, either coincidentally or deliberately, borne by Jews from their native h ab ita t into Israel’s life? Even when we use the expression “ the American way of doing things,” as some use it for life in Israel, this indicates nothing more than the inclusion in our baggage of a cultural commodity picked up on non-Jewish soil.

We then come to a second question: How will the Yishuv welcome these cultural contributions? In the latter case — i.e . avowed introduction of foreign cultural elements — the Israeli Jew accepts it in its undiluted form and appreciates it in plain terms for w hat it is worth as a cosmopolitan en- deavor to commingle m any diverse cultural influences within Israel. In the former case — i. e. introduction of Jewish cultural ideas coincidentally born on foreign soil — there may, and often does, crop up an Israeli resistance, either overtly by an outright rebuff, or covertly, by wasting no time in assimilating it to their own mode, their own taste, their own needs, their own desires.

In these cultural institutional contributions to the upbuilding of Israel, world Jewry sincerely m eant to shoot a figurative hawser line over a gaping abyss which would transport cable-baskets containing cultural and spiritual cargoes back and forth, serving both communities with equal helpfulness. To a certain extent this effort proved inadequate, because (a) institutions, as such, are inherently limited as vehicles for the conveyance of ideas; (b) prac- tical application of the original cultural purposes was not sufficiently and thoroughly thought through; and most im portantly (c) they simply did not answer the specific cultural needs of the respective communities, or else did not create the com petent channels for such bi-polar influences. ( I t is the firm opinion of the w riter th a t the broad community-mass interpenetration of cultural and communal influences can be accomplished best through the Zionist movement. B ut this is a thought which ranges far afield.)

Toynbee in A Study of History has worded a thought which indirectly illuminates the objective for which world Jewry strove, b u t somehow failed to a tta in : “ I t is the easiest thing in the world for commerce to export a new W estern technique. I t is infinitely harder for a W estern poet or saint to kindle in a non-W estern soul the spiritual flame which is alight in his own.”

This thought brings to hand the convinced thesis of this paper th a t it is the realm of religion which can summon Conservative Judaism ’s greatest contribution to Israel — a contribution in which, again in the sphere of religion, Conservative Judaism is endowed with unm atched capacities for a destiny­

4 9O U R M O V E M E N T A N D T H E S T A T E O F I S R A E L

laden task. For, to paraphrase Toynbee’s m etaphor, a religious light has been ignited in the Diaspora which can kindle a flame in Israel — a fused flame whose augm ented glow will radiate spiritual warm th to Jew ry the world over.

As of today, in the realm of religion, the Diaspora has introduced nothing significant to Israel, except perhaps the financial maintenance of religiously colored institutions. The concepts and structure of religion prevailing in Israel today represent the indigenous legacy from M andatory and pre- M andatory days. Except for irrational forays into the outside, the ultra- orthodox remain alienated by self-imposed barriers and besotted by twisted fanaticism. In all tru th , further, the ineffectiveness of the Chief Rabbinates and their legal-hierarchical structures and organizations cannot be concealed. Instead of becoming a v ibrant force for a religious revival in the land, the Chief R abbinate has become a bulwark of vested interest and temporal power, bereft of profound spiritual influence among the rank and file of Israeli Jewry and weighted with archaic technical trivia of no enduring significance.

Moreover, the “religious bloc” parties in Israel have largely developed so in name only. Anyone conversant with the intim ate realities of life in Israel or w ith the operation of the W orld Zionist Organization can testify, with the corroboration of abundant evidence, th a t M izrachi, Hapoel Hamizrachi, Aguda, etc., have become very little more than political power blocs, and in order to achieve simple and unalloyed political ends, have a t innumerable times exploited their “religious” orientation and identification. As such, their im pact upon the enhancem ent of religious life in Israel has been severely, if not mortally, circumscribed. These parties have not hesitated to join in gloomy concert w ith religiously obscurantist forces in subversion of religious ideals for political power. Instead of refining politics in the crucible of religion in the direction of ת שמים מלכו , they have oftentimes let themselves be implicated in the perpetuation of inequities and iniquities.

Now, all this time something has been happening religiously in the Dias- pora. This “som ething” has been the rise and rapid growth of Reform and Conservative Judaism . In contradistinction to the export of financial and physical sustenance to the Yishuv, these relatively new spiritual ideas, sprout- ing and flourishing in the religiously voluntaristic communities of the Diaspora, found no transport to Israel. Historically, this blockage has several causes. F irst, the vehement anti-Zionism of early Reform rendered suspect to the Palestinian Jew anything deviating from the old and familiar pattern of Judaism (whether observed or ignored, a t least the Jew there knew w hat it was about). Secondly, Conservative Judaism as a new religious force, was relatively unknown in its im pact on world Judaism (we m ust never forget th a t Conservative Judaism , in the old days, was orthodoxy in modern garb). In addition, on American soil, m ost of the efforts of individual Conservative Jews to Zionism were directed into political and financial channels, prim arily via the instrum entalities of the existing Zionist organizations. Thirdly, the early leadership of the Yishuv epitomized the rebellious flight from religion — it was the red flag which fluttered a t the apex of Palestinian Jewish leadership.

J O S E P H P. S T E R N S T E I N5 0

Fourthly, the aforementioned hostility of the officially constituted Jewish religious authorities, implacable and resolute, against any diverging religious spirit. Finally, and this most significant, the very inapplicability of the modern religious rationale (spring as it did from the singular web of circumstances prevailing in the Diaspora) for the needs, demands and criteria of religious adherence and observance in the early days of the Yishuv. W hy modify a religious service linguistically when the very colloquial speech was the “ tongue of the prophets?” W hy study the development and significance of Judaism and religion generally when “religion was an opiate of the masses?” As yet, in the early days, the quivering strings of the inquiring philosophical-theological heart in the Diaspora did not strike corresponding chords in the still insensitive heart of the Palestinian Jew, still immured as he was in the morass of malarial swamps.

Slowly, however, the procession of events in Israel and outside are taking their toll in religious change. An awakening interest in m atters other than m aterial is becoming hearteningly evident. Concom itant with the riveting of the increasingly agitated minds of Israeli youth on spiritual problems, there is emerging a growing resentm ent of the ossified encrustations which thw art wholesome religious expression. Also, the establishm ent of a political en tity — the S ta te — and its necessary obeisance to the political and civic tenets of W estern democracy has highlighted the norm ative ideal of church-state separation, and has illuminated the embarrassingly dark corner where lurk m any religio-political difficulties, exemplified by such awkward and dis­comfiting principles as rabbinic control of domestic relations. In addition, the prom inent role of Conservative and Reform rabbis in the Zionist M ovement, albeit not religiously, has provided salutary opportunities for the Israeli to be exposed to the true nature of the movements to which they minister. Further, it would be unfair to denigrate completely the embryonic movement for spiritual revival budding even within the ranks of Israeli orthodoxy. The real fact of the inescapable pressures of day to day living compel examination and re-examination of traditional modes of law and life. Even the orthodox cannot skirt the powerful rivers of historical events and escape undrenched. Lastly, and the effect is only now being articulated, there is discernible a slowly- evolving atmosphere within world Zionism rendering belated and long-overdue homage to the centrality of the religious impulse in Zionism’s ideological heritage.

A t this juncture of historical influences, Conservative Judaism as a move­m ent looms astride the religious road of Israeli Jewry, and can now begin to render historic service to the cause of world Judaism.

Before defining this challenging opportunity, let us cast a quick glance a t our record as a movement vis-a-vis Israel. Schechter, Friedlaender, Ginzberg, M arx — all were eloquent and courageous exponents of Zionism. Their towering strength, in fact, proved a buttress of support, not only within our religious movement, bu t sustained the ram parts of early American Zionism generally. We are prone to forget th a t even as a movement, the: United

יי

Synagogue built the Yeshurun Synagogue in Israel. Y et it should have been foreseen th a t the seeds nurtured in this potentially significant contribution would fail of efflorescence, submerged as they were in arid soil and bereft of beneficent watering of wise and calculated financial support. As a movement, therefore, our contribution has been, as in the la tter case, of a building, an institution which was quickly assimilated to the Yishuv’s religious coloring, or alternately, as represented by Conservative Jews individually, in the normal course of Zionist activity.

As a religious movement, however, we are confronted with the task of introducing, or awakening interest in, our religious ideology, which in its broad religious aspects will create a common religious tie, sustaining and invigorating Judaism as it prevails universally, while adapting itself to the individual convolutions of each Jewish com m unity’s problems and opportunities.

This urgently needed task, we subm it, can be accomplished best by Con- servative Judaism. For Conservative Judaism , in its historical and religious evolution, embodies facts of unique relevancy and com patability for the religious challegnes and needs of Israeli Jewry. Reform, even though increasing its scope of traditional observance, still lacks th a t indissoluble legal ־historical link with the unbroken disciplinary continuity of Judaism which to us is norm ative Jewish consciousness. Orthodoxy, on the other hand, represents a confused ambivalence in its a ttitu d e toward the historical development of traditional Judaism and its applied pertinence to contem porary Jewish living. Conservative Judaism , however, embodies the propitious intersection and juxtaposition of both the vertical historical-religious line — th a t is, our deter- m ination to safeguard the integrity of tradition as a legal-religious-historical continuity and discipline — and the horizontal line — namely, the identifica- tion of the Jewish people in the contem porary context as a determ inative factor in the evolution of הלכה and life. Anchored in the bedrock of Jewish discipline, Conservative Judaism can have appeal for the thinking Israeli Jew who makes short shrift of a religious regimen truncated by the slices of alien and capricious distractions.

The sensitive Israeli Jew has verbalized his worry about the Jewish character and identification of the Israeli. He has been distressed to watch pageants, hear songs, and even a ttend debates in the Knesset (as for example, during consideration of the terminology in which the Independence Declaration should be couched) which reflected relative disdain for traditional Jewish values and concepts. He has also been disquieted by the deprecation of world Jew ry in various phases by significant elements of Israeli Jews. If cultivation of a religious ideology could counteract these centrifugal tendencies, this sensitive Israeli would ally himself w ith the effort for its inculcation.

Hence, the thinking Israeli Jew feels the im perative need for the vertical and horizontal frame. From the standpoint of religious education, he has become increasingly anxious about insinuating distortions among Israeli youth in their intellectual dismissal of specific historical epochs, while from the point of view of the unity and im portance of Jewish peoplehood, he has become

O U R M O V E M E N T A N D T H E S T A T E O F I S R A E L 51

J O S E P H P. S T E R N S T E 1 N5 2

increasingly disturbed about the diverging drift of American and Israeli Jewry. He will therefore embrace those forces embodying the restoration of authentic Judaism , synthesizing the im portance of all the people with the im portance of all the tradition, and religiously, Conservative Judaism is the only such force refreshingly available to him.

Conservative Judaism is, religiously, challenged by portentous demands and unusual opportunities. How can we respond?

Individually, we m ust continue to affiliate with and support the Zionist movement wholeheartedly and enthusiastically. Aside from the excruciatingly severe pressure of political tasks, and the equally demanding financial obli­gations — tasks which will intrude upon our serenity for a long time to come — it is the w riter’s conviction th a t the Zionist movement is moving into a wide and im portant area of Jewish service which will contribute much to Jewry.

As a religious movement, we m ust seek direct access to the people of Israel. How? Although it will probably be true for a long while to come th a t in Israel Conservative Rabbis will be refused acknowledgement by the Chief Rabbinate as recognized rabbinic authorities, we would surely not countenance an a ttem p t to m aneuver for power through any form of irredentism. Similarly, cordial words u ttered by Israeli official unofficially, and vainglorious words uttered by us from a distance, also ring hollow. We m ust seek ways to ignite the spirit, and this can be done in only one m anner — by example.

The desideratum for which we m ust strive is the element whereby the rooted rationale and spiritual tentacles of Conservative Judaism can be in ter­twined into the soil and fabric of Israeli life. We m ust seek direct contact with the Israeli, provide him with this guiding compass of religious life, train him in its effective use and let him operate it for his own spiritual orientation.

The founding of the rPO’as is bu t the first step, and appraised as such in its initial modesty, it bodes to render invaluable service, prim arily as an instru­m entality of exposing the future American Conservative rabbi to the milieu of Israeli life. Y et this alone will not kindle a fire. For it is quite problematical as to whether a young American Jew in Israel for a quick sojourn, unsure as yet of his own spiritual moorings, can exercise a sufficient im pact upon Israeli society, either alone or on concert with his fellow students. A nother step m ay be the creation of some sort of adult studies academy, as envisaged by Franz Rosenzweig’s conception of a Lehrhaus, dealing not only with scholarly and technical subjects, b u t also instituting seminars on the problems, philosophy and needs of Jewish life in Israel and elsewhere.

An indispensable addition would be a model Synagogue, whose service would contain the ideally desirable features of Synagogue worship as well as cultural and social activities, appropriately designed for the Israeli m atrix of religious criteria.

Around these projects whose prime m otivation would be the dissemination of the religious idea, would gather those elements in Israeli life who are earnestly striving for religious insight and inspiration. We can anticipate they and their families become living, active nuclei of a Judaism , practiced publicly

1

and a t home, which would be reflective of the highest aspirations of our movement.

The pace and tempo of each com m unity’s advance in religious and social gains is determined by its own net of circumstances — economic, social, political, cultural, spiritual — and by its own time and place. The respective communities are inevitably th rust into the necessity of deriving meaningful interpretation of Judaism for their own time and their own clime. In this m anner we can hope th a t Jews the world over will benefit by the experiences of their brethren, and by rebounding against each other, can enlarge the spiritual patrim ony of Judaism . There is no more salient area for such fruitful reciporcal influence than religion.

Thus, by im penetration of the Israeli Jewish community, we can become implicated in a religious effort there whose salutary effects will directly enhance the cause of Judaism in Israel, b u t will inevitably redound to the enduring benefit of American and world Jewry.

O U R M O V E M E N T A N D T H E S T A T E O F I S R A E L 5 3